I think Rigol is intentionally making their scopes hackable. Best marketing ploy ever. They must have sold thousands (extra) of the DS1000 series because people know they can hack them to improve their performance. Same goes for the 2000 series and probably others. If they wanted to they could surely "fix" the hacking issue , but that would hurt sales!!
As is siglent. After several years on the market, my shiny new SDS1102X-E is now a SDS1202X-E, double the bandwidth, with the logic analyser and AWG functions unlocked. I’ll be buying both dongles in due time, which is also a fantastic way to do things. The AWG connects via USB, the LA by HDMI. You don’t need to pay for the extra hardware when you don’t want it, but you have an upgrade path when you do later on. Every scope should be like this, even if not hackable. It’s had a good dozen firmware updates over its lifetime and the hack has remained the same.
In the day I worked a 1200 line per minute printer. The company also made a lower cost 600 lpm printer. The difference was a acknowledged signal sent by the printer. It limited max print speed. The price difference was substantial. This is very similar.
I wonder if they ship "early" units with fewer changes, but have the potential of using lower-cost versions at a later date? Like "we wanted to use a cheaper FPGA and front end, but they weren't quite done by the time that marketing demanded we ship." Or "supply chain problems, to be fixed later."
I suspect it may be more like with how the supply chain is, they went as hard as they could consolidating parts so they'd have less to source and bigger, higher priority orders.
I don't think there is a reason to develop a cheaper version of an almost fully integrated front end because development is the major part of the cost. So since they most likely don't already have another suitable frontend for the application and going with an off the shelf solution is guaranteed to be more expensive apart from maby a cheaper FPGA (and even that is not very likely) I don't expect any changes with the later units. It is just cheaper and better to leave it like this. So bandwidth unlocks and 50Ohm termination hacks are probably going to follow soon enough.
It could be that it's cheaper to buy a larger quantity of the higher spec or be easier for inventory management. The chip supplier might give them price support on the greater volumes, especially as they can expect to sell more of the cheaper model. But the opportunity for a cost reduced design would be attractive to some exec at some point.
Good job RIGOL, the basic version has the same quality as the higher version even the FPGA! This is very hackable :) They for sure are building them at an amazing cost As you say Dave: Winner winner, 🐔 dinner!!
Particularly now it must be difficult to acquire components so keeping all the same might be a better choice than trying to source different components and then having to pay a premium to source them when they become unavailable. Tough times. Cool video, thanks!
Exactly. If supply, lead times and prices weren't concerns, a firm can engineer each model down to the bare minimum. In the present world, they are better off minimizing part SKUs and keeping themselves higher on suppliers' priority lists by ordering higher volumes of fewer parts. This also focuses support engineers and repair techs on a smaller set of troubleshooting procedures.
Precisely this. If you need to preorder the fpga in large numbers, it’s better to standardise on one and then be able to make either product line depending on what actually sells.
This is nothing new especially in lower volume commercial gear. In 1982 Ampex introduced the ADO which could take a NTSC video signal and twist it around and do things with perspective in real time. It cost $250k (American) and the mainframe was about 14 rack units and drew 3kw of AC power. It was chock of those ultra expansive TRW multiplier chips and mostly TTL with some ECL. The main +5v power supply was 200amps! Then around 1985 they came out with two more versions, the ADO 2000 and 1000. The first production units were now re-named the ADO 3000. Obviously the 2000 and 1000 models lacked features but were an attempt to sell into the smaller market TV stations who could not justify a full 3000 model. As we owned nine of the full 3000 units where I worked and were the beta test site, we were loaned a 2000 model to get our input and thoughts on it's reduced feature set. Well us engineers quickly noticed the hardware was identical. So we pulled the PROM set (a bank of 32, 2732 EPROMS, again this was a 1982 design) from a 3000 unit and replaced the PROM set in the 2000. Well it came up as a full 3000 with all features enabled! Anybody with a hobbyist PROM programmer, very common in that day, could duplicate the PROMS. Ampex sales and upper management had a cow and sent the 2000 back to their engineering group to fix that loop hole! Actually they were very thankful to us for finding that "bug". As for the ADO 1000, it was missing several boards that provided image perspective functions and could not be simply upgraded.
@12:25, there is a big movement and some component layout changes in all of the front-ends passive SMD parts, to the top right of the IC. Actually on closer inspection @9:10, it looks like there might have been drop in quality of the layout when trying to maintain high frequency performance. Maybe the HDO1000 was designed first and some improvement was needed for the HDO4000. Except for the minor larger layout, they are so close that a hack for higher bandwidth would still function. Also @9:10, to the right of the bottom relay, the largest resistor shown, the HDO4000 uses a 2202r resistor while the HDO1000 uses a 2501r resistor.
From a immediate perspective, it makes sense to make the cheaper model first and improve on the second, but in reality there will be less work to do the expensive first with the higher margin and then just dumb it down. Assuming the better paying item also hits market first.
How did I not see that? Looks the exact same architecture though. I still think it's just a normal production change and it would tbe same on the 4000 series now. Only time will tell on that if someone does a later teardown.
@@1kreature Yep, design the high end one and then just software dumb down the cheap model. The trick is in getting the margin at the lower price point.
Very interesting case of crippling for market segmentation, wonder if it would be worthwhile for anyone to salvage/smuggle the ADC ICs to put on those PCBs, but can guarantee there will be software hacks to enable 50 ohms and frequency filters. The hackability of the DS1000Z series was seriously what made it so attractive for many, I almost wonder if this was intentional because of course only hobbyists are going to hack their scopes, large companies are still going to just pay for the correct version and have it calibrated yearly etc. Would expect hardware configuration and revision data to be stored in some memory those days rather resistors or config file in the eMMC, likely candidate is that C64TA SOIC above the SoC, seems to be some FRAM device, probably also stores serial, calibration data, power on time and relay cycles, might be worth a follow up to see if you can read the data off it with your TL866? Hopefully it has some "unlock_all_features=0" entry XD. Did notice bottom right on the HDO1000 front end there's a resistor marked "2501" while on the HDO4000 it's "2202". Everything else looks identical. Also for those thinking it's a different substrate it's purely just a blue colour cast in the still image, in the previous video it's the same colour plus the 94V-0 compliance markings are shared across the two PCBs.
The ARTIX FPGA is way cheaper than you think Dave, it's almost 10X lower price than digikey. I have bought FPGAs for more than 10 years from china and the price is almost 10X lower than Digikey in single QTY.
@@EEVblog Perhaps the R&D costs of using two different FPGAs outweighed the cost difference of them. There is probably a pin-compatible cheaper artix-7 they could drop into the hdo1000, but maybe Rigols HDL firmware would not fit within the constraints of the cheaper fpga without significant modification.
They might not make money on the base model, just foot in the door and bait for bigger, brand loyalty. It makes good sense to have same layout and same processing to save all cost on software and if the chips aren't critically expensive it's just easier to reuse it. Even if you use different ADs the board and software could be virtually identical. Also a few parts jumping in the frontends. How much does the AD cost?
Torx screws ain't rubbish. They are a lot less prone to wearing out and require less force! (except there are those annoying Torx screws with the pin in the middle).
@@EEVblog i just want to say that this is both incredible unhelpfull, and that i, as semi-regular dont get it either... Rubbish as in "just another word for stuff", but not really negative?
When one sits down & thinks about it further, I believe Rigol is possibly playing 4D level chess in the scope market here. I'm sure there are far more non-obvious differences to hamper the lower cost model but I feel their approach with the HDO1000 is to possibly go for volume sales across a wider customer base spread & sure, the extra BOM cost might add up but so do their sales wins. The other logical reason is likely due to supply chain issues that ADCs & the extra chip/component supply lines are hampered due to the global supply line situation so Rigol had to adapt. Furthermore, FPGAs are getting much cheaper & the real cost is in programming development, or maybe Rigol are toying with ideas for new scopes & wants to test the market waters. Long ago, an ETI magazine designer stated "If you can't hide it, make it a feature". That Rigol scopes coincidentally seem to be a hackers dream isn't lost on their sales/marketing & engineering/design teams as the HDO1000 & the MSO5000 scopes attract not just the lower end of the market ie hobbyist & cash strapped techs but I feel it's a killer move over their competitors ie Sglent, Hantek, Uni-T, Tektronix etc by also enticing those who love hacking things & have enticed buyers to get a foot in the door to explore more Rigol products ie Spectrum analysers, PSUs etc building their goodwill even further. The growth in hacking & channels like "Linus Tech Tips", "Hak5" & all the defcon conference interest is definitely not being ignored by manufacturers who are likely thinking of new ways to market their products & gain a competitive edge, especially as global economies falter & people's budgets tighten. This is in direct contrast to companies like Apple, John Deere etc who seem to enjoy locking everything down & maybe new tech breed companies like Rigol have detected the anti-lockdown sentiment & are developing products to exploit the opportunity. Rigol knew they made an absolute killing on their DSO1000 series scopes & sure, re-using the PCB design knowledge so will entice even more buyers to the Rigol product range. Lest we forget that Rigol with their DSO1000 series scopes literally threw a cat amongst the pigeons & has changed the way we all view scopes & I see many of their design decisions have filtered through to other manufacturers. Hampering cheaper products by manufacturers is nothing new as I've seen TVs, printers, minicomputers, industrial electronics boards, consumer electronics boards which have taken similar approaches. Having said that, Rigol are making no product guarantees as to any performance specs to further refine the design in later models & I wouldn't be surprised to see later versions with cheaper FPGAs & ADCs, redesigned PCBs in line with the declared specs per product. My own dilemma now is whether to invest in a Rigol MSO5000 or a HDO1000 4 channel scope. I applaud Rigol for giving hobbyists, hackers, techs & engineers some real cost effective choices in the scope market
@9:15 There is more via-stitching on the right side image (the 4000) indicating either we've got different channels displayed (not likely, Dave's too on-top-of-it for that) OR they are doing more work to isolate adjacent channels to reduce cross talk and give better strip-line/micro-strip performance... in other words, they might be demi-crippling the 1000 by altering the controlled impedance nature of the pcb and making the 1000 a bit 'noisier' as you approach/exceed the rated bandwidth. Maybe, possibly? Those traces in the 'flowed area between the relay and the 50 ohm device "appear" to be wider on the 1000 than the 4000 (by maybe 20%?) .. that could increase the distributed capacitance per unit length a bit. I mean, vias are cheap. It's a trivial change in the Gerber files (or whatever the kids are using these days). No additional parts. It might be fun to try to measure the width of the traces in the pre-A/D section... another way to alter the performance without altering the BOM. Hey what do I know? ... I've been out of the biz for (gasp!!) for a while. It's been nearly 3 decades since I left Mentor Graphics PCB Highspeed Design Tools Group.
This is called "sweating the product/asset" ... they already had a design, they halved the sample-rate and banged another device out to get additional dollars for no additional research, they won't care too much if people hack the 'upgraded' version of the oscilloscope, they've made their margin anyway. When people talking about 'margin' they need to remember, that a lot of the margin in a product goes to 'Labour', in this case, there wouldn't have been much additional labour involved, they're banging out basically the same product and it's probably already mostly automated... having a different product or a product that varies significantly would actually cost more, it would have been hours of intensive design work, and then testing etc etc.
It is amazing what you can find out about a product when you open it up. I wonder what are the differences in the features of the two scopes that are software enabled. I would expect to find features in the 4000 that are enabled by default are software enabled in the 1000 but cost extra to get the required key.
I like my Tektronix 465B with DM44 and CMC251 frequency counter, HP8566B spectrum analyzer, Keithley 2001 w/ scan card and 4-wire kelvin probes, Rohde & Schwarz HMP2020 programmable power supply, Siglent SDG1032x awg, Simpson 260 series 8PRT, HP-410B VTVM, HP 4284A LCR Meter, Fluke 79 series II industrial electrical DMM that's been to absolute hell and back thousands of trips for 30 years and STILL works a champ...and my old black bakelite pressure style spring pressure style Amprobe. Got a couple of them big rack mount HP Harrison linear power supplies built in the 1960's...YES they still put out clean power with plenty of OOmPFH. LOVE me some new toys once in a while...especially when they promise hackey shenanigans. I would set it on my intern's bench as a gift I think...make HIM hack it. Then - sitting by all my ancient equipment that was built RIGHT...mock him with "You kids, n yer MUSIC!...with yer roller skates n yer hopscotch...yer 23 skiddoo! That's always fun.
I once worked on a product where we sold two models and the BOM difference was less than $10 and we sold it for £50 more. The main reason was to provide some clean air between the models at the retailers.
@@jan.tichavsky The Rigol manual for this series of oscilloscopes mentions another model HDO2000, that doesn't even exist yet, but they will certainly launch soon.
Possible, but from a design perspective you would try and avoid that, just adds to the complexity to develop and maintain them. Better to just limit the sample rate and analog bandwidth.
Nicely spotted. That's one the output differential pairs. I don't know why there are two output diff pairs. I wouldn't expect different bandwidth outputs, but maybe one is the dedicated 800MHz path and that's not populated here?
@@EEVblog given that both adcs have 4 inputs it would seem that in 4 channel mode at the highest rates they interleave all 4 channels.on both adcs. So the dual output make sense
There is two chips difference right in the middel there is another chip and a cap which seem to have been removed, right below there is another change with a small package. They might have changed the logic in the Altera chip though I suspect that they have simply found it is cheaper to make one solution and one tool chain for the whole series than it is to design multiple tool chains for each tier in the series. As for why populate things that you do not need? I think they populated everything they needed to not have anything floating and as a result misbehaving. The chips that they "had" to use look to be fairly simple chips that are all in house designed and probably dirt cheap. If I where to put a price on it my guess is that the "extra" hardware they put in here costs them no more than $20 extra, vs a new design, with a different board layout, all new paths for the pick and place robots new testing setup, different tests and so on an so forth. I am willing to bet they have found that this is on a whole a lot cheaper way of producing differently tiered machines. My guess is the volumes in which they expect to sell these things are not big enough to justify the additional spend of all that tooling and extra work to limit this thing from a hardware perspective. As for the hacker argument, there are not all that many people with the tools and the money to go out buy this thing and modify it, those that have both will already have at least a few scopes and several projects on the go they might very well not have the interest in or the need to mess with this thing. Those that do are going to be a small minority of the userbase as any shop buying this will likely opt to keep the warranty rather than to crack open a brand new scope and poke around in it to get it to perform slightly better. If they need a better performing scope surely the company can and should buy one and if they are just doing it for fun it is not going to be paid for by the company I would hope nor would I expect that to be sanctioned by the company. So the loss that hacking of the lower tier machines would cause is likely way to small for Rigol to worry about.
Not likely binning by removing any hardware...The blank locations never had components assembled. Sometimes land pads are moved to accommodate higher SMT yields. It is very common these days to use the same PCB for multiple products....especially when NRE consumes a large chunk of profit margins.
Well, as is more and more the case today, it is cheaper to give everyone the same hardware (and have to do only a single design, a single PCB, a single manufacturing line) and then differentiate using software, than to optimize on BOM cost for each model. However, there are risks as well. E.g. there now is that debate about BMW cars where heated seats are an option, for which you can pay at time of order, but when you don't pay it the heated seats are installed anyway but they are disabled in software. And, you can later opt to enable them paying a "subscription fee". It is similar to what you see in this scope, but apparently people despise of it. They claim they already have paid the seats and have to pay extra to use them. Similar to when Rigol would offer update packs to enable some 4000-line features in the 1000 line, either for a one-time payment or as part of some subscription package. Some people would welcome it, others would bad-mouth it.
There might be a change in the second chip above the bird too. The chip on the higher end scope has text on it, which isn't present on the other one. Not sure if it's actually different or not.
how many of these things do they realistically sell? Has to be like 50,000 or less. At those numbers, to make economies of scale work, you have to consolidate as much as possible with other models
Even on their own international website, a series is named "DHO4000" in the table, but the picture shows the example product labelled with "HDO4804". I'm *guessing* they decided to change the model number at a late stage, but haven't corrected everything yet.
I think your prediction may be backwards. It happens a lot that for ease of design early sun models include hardware that’s too good. Then they spend time looking at where they can save money and they start downgrading the parts that are too good. So predicting that the boards will end up on same revision I think is wrong. I think they will diverge more on next iteration.
Much like automobile building the margins are in the addons . So the bottom of the is low enough to make that the new board and bom is low enough to make the overall production profitable given the level of pick and place and using the same case. Looks like an economy of scale thing where there is lower cost by using same board and sorting the grade of chips . As others have said lower grade of same chips in the cheaper unit.
I think these are different revisions of the same board. They would not modify the high end one to low end, and leave so many pads still there that will never be used. I bet that the cheaper one is a newer revision of the higher end one. There are major differences in ground planes pours, and some via stitching. And minor frontend components placement changes.
I thought the same but it's just the lighting of the two photos. The ground pour and traces all look identical. And there are often lots of unpopulated pads on devices like computers.
I heard that R&S does not have 50Ohms inside their "education market" range of scopes exactly for that reason. For a clueless student it is too easy to blow one up! If you need a terminator then external BNC passthrough terminators are reasonably cheap and they are much more robust. And students will not chase ultimate analog performance anyway. Also there is an additional educational benefit in actually demonstrating the terminator and showing what happens if you physically remove it while not changing anything else. The 1M only options are just more suitable for the application.
Just watched "The Love Box in Your Living Room" - a comedy pisstake of the history of the BBC by Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse, and in the credits at the end was a credit to 'Dave Jones / EEVBlog'. No idea what for, but it did feature a few Sinclair C5's!
the 4000's ADCs also have 4 differential pairs on both possibly using 11 bit ADCs or maybe they are just giving all 4 channels to both ADCs to intelligently decide how to split up the channels for the highest bandwidth no matter what 2 channels are on?
As usual, the ADCs work interleaved. Each package has 4 ADC channels in it. but on the higher spec model both adc chips work with time interleaving as welll to double the sample rate.
couple of questionss.... 1) will there be any mso version of this new platform coming? (ofc with different pcb etc, but same frontend and adcs fpga, same software etc.). 2) cant we also examine the 2 channels board too, and just be checking how feasible it might be to add back missing channels? (clearly the bncs aren"t there, but what else? would be nice to see). many thanks & glad i waited btw this price point makes the 4 channels version same price as the siglent 2000 plus (non hd, so 10 bit, but with mso)... so that was the scope i was saving up to get. a comparison would be really cool. or if siglent ever intend to compete here by dropping the price on their 12-bit hd model... speaking of comparing (i guess all 3 of those scopes)... i remember recently we were discussing also about the zoom out scrolling, history modes or something on the forum.... that siglent has an improvement for their 12-bit hd scope. but the regular plus hardware is just different and most likely not capable of getting that improvement. so i wonder if this new rigol hdo1074 does have this feature. the usability and all that. another point is that this scope is not mixed signal.. however in combination with the pc software and the 10mhz clock sync could there potentially be some way to sync up a dedicated logic analyzer? (at least in theory). and then to time align the capture between this rigol hdo and that dedicated logic analyzer? bit of a silly question, it would be better to wait for an mso version of this scope platform. just occured to me as another possible form of content around these 'the new budget entry level scopes'. (just not all of my questions here might not be worth covering though)
If you have a look in the manual, the 70 to 200MHz is clearly stated to just be a SW option. They've probably tried to do a better job at making this hacker "proof" than the first series, but we'll see.
Let's see it that way: They make about the same margin on the low end one if it shares all the parts with the higher end one compared to a separate unit with its own lower end parts but with a separate development life cycle. In contrast they make huge margins on the high end one because it shares all the parts and development with the lower end one.
The top left QR code is gone. And it seems like they changed the silk screen font - check out the "V" in "94V-0" in the board label (moved from center to bottom right). Maybe the voltages didn't look good at their small size with the new font?
94V-0 sounds like a UL classification. UL marking are typically added by the board manufacturer. We see that the soldermask is clearly different, so those PCBs came from different board manufacturers.
This is more like it for the hobby budget. Super duper expensive test equipment has it's place. Will the high end features ever be used? 😎 Thanks for the interesting Rigol 12 bit scope.
Still happy with my "old" DS4014 (Serialgenerator did open all Features and enable 500MHz). 4GS, 12 Bit, 500MHz - nothing I possible would miss with the new versions :-). And everything for $1200 :-)
Now hear me out for a second. You can buy a $999 DHO1074 and a $699 DHO1072. You can then swap in the missing ADC from the 1072 into the 1074 and then unlock the bandwidth to 800MHz. You basically get a HDO4804 without the peripherals for $1000 less.
Do you think they use the same configuration stream for the fpga in both models? They might lock options that way? Or is fpga configuration part of the firmware?
I guess Rigol avoids the cost of designing a new pcb, but still, I'd agree, people will be looking to hack the FW, perhaps even have Rossmann solder on an additional ADC. They must still be making a couple of bucks at 699.
They did the same with MSO5000. Software becomes so more complicated on each generation that doesn't make any sense to wipe different CPU/MCU/FPGA on each pcb for this scale and price point.
I really interested to see if the 2ch scope has the same ADC. Sure I'm not the person who will do this, but if this thing gets hacked I see no problem in salvage an ADC from the 2ch version, add a few LDOs and load some HDO4000-style firmware...
Wonder if They are making it upgradeable in the future. Like an Exchange Program. They do that in the Defense Industry. So they can sell to other Allied County's in accordance with Export Controls. ITAR,EAR.
As you surmised, the hardware is only a very small portion of the cost of a modern oscilloscope. The majority of the expense is in the development of the software and keeping it up-to-date. While you might be able to flash a different set of firmware on the scope, after adding/upgrading specific components, staying up-to-date on the software might be a challenge, and would obviously be pirating.
They are finally finding uses for all the rockchips, I've had one with a mali gpu in a cheap car head unit running android. They used to be the chip in all those really crappy tablets.
So Louis Rossman was right some day Rigol will soon have monthly suscription for enabling extra features for $50 a month as the hardware is nearly the same!!!
I have been always intruged by frequency counters. Have a few but don't know have knowledge to use those. No clue where to connect on a receiver to see the frequency I am listening to, or, a transmitter to see the actual frequency broadcasting (all for ham purposes). Care to help? Cheers,.
I think Rigol do this on purpose knowing theres a market for a low end hackable scope, just look at the success of the previous 1000 series 🤷♂️ .. 4 ch aswel for 1000buck awesome.. I wouldn't personally consider a 2ch scope when you can have 4ch for a couple of hundred bucks more, having 4 channels is just so useful, the times ive needed an extra channel compared to a faster sample rate speaks for itself 👍😎 looks like a nice scope.. I bought a 2000 series but I ended up selling it as it only had 2ch and was glitchy as hell, yes it was nice to have the larger screen and separate controls for each channel but I couldn't trust what I was looking at, freezing display, vanishing traces and so on ... Shame.... I went back to my 4ch hacked 1000series, and of course I've got my trusty CRO Tek 2465 which I love and will always be on my bench 👍
@eevblog .... i bought a 190-504. Always wanted one and I found a good deal. I wanted to check harmonics and now ive done that. Im not an EE....so now what else can i do with it!!??? i work in an industrial plant. I want to put it to work.
So we need to find someone who sells that custom ADC, so people can upgrade ;-D Apart from that, really stupid idea, just sell the maxed out one for like $1500. Paying $700 for crippled one sucks and $2500 for a few extra parts sucks equally.
Probably not it. The position of them does not make sense, and the arrangement of resistors between those boards is identical. I'm betting configuration is done via a ROM chip somewhere. Or just different firmware. If Rigol were to lock it down I guess they could make the firmware encrypted and use some safe boot capability potentially with the private key burned into E-fuse of the SoC?
I'm a bit confused here. The o'scope in this video is the HDO1204 (4 channels, 12-bit, 200MHz), which the Rigol site says costs $1,699. It's only the HDO1072 (2 channels, 12-bit, 70MHz) which is listed at $699 on the site?
@@electronash At some point in the video Dave corrects himself and says that you have to pay $999 if you want 4 channels (HDO1074). In other words: $999 (and not $699) is the "entry fee" as the 70 MHz 4-channel model will very likely use the same hardware (apart from the model sticker) as the HDO1204 -- and obviously Dave takes it as a given that it will be hackable like the earlier Rigol scopes.
@@oldguy9051 Yeah, it's not technically inaccurate, but I did initially think the o'scope in the teardown was the $699 model. It may make some people think you can buy the 4-channel version at that price. Still, it looks very promising that they can be hacked. I'd be happy to even solder the extra ADC chip if there was any way of getting hold of them. I find this a lot like the right-to-repair / John Deere thing. I know companies need to make profit, but putting software locks on boards that are almost identical (and charging a big premium for the unlock) is shameful, tbh. It's a little bit like the Sky Plus satellite boxes in the UK (and elsewhere) - the box itself is perfectly capable of recording, pausing and playback of channels without any interaction from Sky. But if you don't pay the subscription, they don't allow that feature to work, even if you paid for hardware yourself in full. I don't even think Rigol can say you're paying for extra quality control or "software", as the 'scope models are so similar. (although I guess they wouldn't be able to put any guarantees on a hacked o'scope actually reaching the full bandwidth or sample rate, which is understandable.) This reply ended up a lot longer than I expected, sorry. lol
btw, I get that some of these Rigol scopes are still great value-for-money anyway, and that maybe they are doing us a favour by making things hackable. But I'd also be very annoyed if I was a customer paying $1,699 for the HDO1204, and then a few months later, saw that the $999 HDO1074 could be easily hacked to do the same job.
@@electronash The GPU and CPU in your PC could probably be hacked to something higher speed, are you very annoyed by that too? Its how industry works.
Sometimes i do not understand sjit from want you are saying.....but when you say it i understand! Must be my relatives who live around your corner in Sidney ;)
How much does the high speed 12-bit ADC cost? When I’ve looked at giga-sample ADCs on Mouser they’ve been up in the $100 range, or higher, so the ADCs may actually be the majority of the parts cost.
I think Rigol is intentionally making their scopes hackable. Best marketing ploy ever. They must have sold thousands (extra) of the DS1000 series because people know they can hack them to improve their performance. Same goes for the 2000 series and probably others. If they wanted to they could surely "fix" the hacking issue , but that would hurt sales!!
Just like a plastation ;)
Ah the old Winrar method.
Worked also for the 4000 Series - "upgraded" mine from 100mhz to 500 :-)
As is siglent. After several years on the market, my shiny new SDS1102X-E is now a SDS1202X-E, double the bandwidth, with the logic analyser and AWG functions unlocked. I’ll be buying both dongles in due time, which is also a fantastic way to do things. The AWG connects via USB, the LA by HDMI. You don’t need to pay for the extra hardware when you don’t want it, but you have an upgrade path when you do later on. Every scope should be like this, even if not hackable. It’s had a good dozen firmware updates over its lifetime and the hack has remained the same.
@@uzaiyaro When did you hack the Singlent and firmware version? Thanks.
In the day I worked a 1200 line per minute printer. The company also made a lower cost 600 lpm printer. The difference was a acknowledged signal sent by the printer. It limited max print speed. The price difference was substantial. This is very similar.
I wonder if they ship "early" units with fewer changes, but have the potential of using lower-cost versions at a later date?
Like "we wanted to use a cheaper FPGA and front end, but they weren't quite done by the time that marketing demanded we ship." Or "supply chain problems, to be fixed later."
it sounds like a long therm complication do have different FPGAs and front ends in the field.
Imaging developing and rolling out updates.
I suspect it may be more like with how the supply chain is, they went as hard as they could consolidating parts so they'd have less to source and bigger, higher priority orders.
I don't think there is a reason to develop a cheaper version of an almost fully integrated front end because development is the major part of the cost. So since they most likely don't already have another suitable frontend for the application and going with an off the shelf solution is guaranteed to be more expensive apart from maby a cheaper FPGA (and even that is not very likely) I don't expect any changes with the later units. It is just cheaper and better to leave it like this. So bandwidth unlocks and 50Ohm termination hacks are probably going to follow soon enough.
It could be that it's cheaper to buy a larger quantity of the higher spec or be easier for inventory management.
The chip supplier might give them price support on the greater volumes, especially as they can expect to sell more of the cheaper model.
But the opportunity for a cost reduced design would be attractive to some exec at some point.
Good job RIGOL, the basic version has the same quality as the higher version even the FPGA! This is very hackable :) They for sure are building them at an amazing cost
As you say Dave: Winner winner, 🐔 dinner!!
Particularly now it must be difficult to acquire components so keeping all the same might be a better choice than trying to source different components and then having to pay a premium to source them when they become unavailable. Tough times. Cool video, thanks!
Exactly. If supply, lead times and prices weren't concerns, a firm can engineer each model down to the bare minimum. In the present world, they are better off minimizing part SKUs and keeping themselves higher on suppliers' priority lists by ordering higher volumes of fewer parts. This also focuses support engineers and repair techs on a smaller set of troubleshooting procedures.
Precisely this. If you need to preorder the fpga in large numbers, it’s better to standardise on one and then be able to make either product line depending on what actually sells.
This is nothing new especially in lower volume commercial gear. In 1982 Ampex introduced the ADO which could take a NTSC video signal and twist it around and do things with perspective in real time. It cost $250k (American) and the mainframe was about 14 rack units and drew 3kw of AC power. It was chock of those ultra expansive TRW multiplier chips and mostly TTL with some ECL. The main +5v power supply was 200amps! Then around 1985 they came out with two more versions, the ADO 2000 and 1000. The first production units were now re-named the ADO 3000. Obviously the 2000 and 1000 models lacked features but were an attempt to sell into the smaller market TV stations who could not justify a full 3000 model. As we owned nine of the full 3000 units where I worked and were the beta test site, we were loaned a 2000 model to get our input and thoughts on it's reduced feature set. Well us engineers quickly noticed the hardware was identical. So we pulled the PROM set (a bank of 32, 2732 EPROMS, again this was a 1982 design) from a 3000 unit and replaced the PROM set in the 2000. Well it came up as a full 3000 with all features enabled! Anybody with a hobbyist PROM programmer, very common in that day, could duplicate the PROMS. Ampex sales and upper management had a cow and sent the 2000 back to their engineering group to fix that loop hole! Actually they were very thankful to us for finding that "bug". As for the ADO 1000, it was missing several boards that provided image perspective functions and could not be simply upgraded.
@12:25, there is a big movement and some component layout changes in all of the front-ends passive SMD parts, to the top right of the IC. Actually on closer inspection @9:10, it looks like there might have been drop in quality of the layout when trying to maintain high frequency performance. Maybe the HDO1000 was designed first and some improvement was needed for the HDO4000. Except for the minor larger layout, they are so close that a hack for higher bandwidth would still function.
Also @9:10, to the right of the bottom relay, the largest resistor shown, the HDO4000 uses a 2202r resistor while the HDO1000 uses a 2501r resistor.
From a immediate perspective, it makes sense to make the cheaper model first and improve on the second, but in reality there will be less work to do the expensive first with the higher margin and then just dumb it down. Assuming the better paying item also hits market first.
How did I not see that? Looks the exact same architecture though. I still think it's just a normal production change and it would tbe same on the 4000 series now. Only time will tell on that if someone does a later teardown.
@@1kreature Yep, design the high end one and then just software dumb down the cheap model. The trick is in getting the margin at the lower price point.
As for the HDO1000 being first, it's bar board date code is newer than the HDO4000 I have.
@@EEVblog2 2 different dates of 2 different release PCBs does not guarantee their design revision date/order, but, it is a good sign.
That price:performance ratio even without hacking is making me consider the purchase and I'm just an occational hobby user
Very interesting case of crippling for market segmentation, wonder if it would be worthwhile for anyone to salvage/smuggle the ADC ICs to put on those PCBs, but can guarantee there will be software hacks to enable 50 ohms and frequency filters. The hackability of the DS1000Z series was seriously what made it so attractive for many, I almost wonder if this was intentional because of course only hobbyists are going to hack their scopes, large companies are still going to just pay for the correct version and have it calibrated yearly etc.
Would expect hardware configuration and revision data to be stored in some memory those days rather resistors or config file in the eMMC, likely candidate is that C64TA SOIC above the SoC, seems to be some FRAM device, probably also stores serial, calibration data, power on time and relay cycles, might be worth a follow up to see if you can read the data off it with your TL866? Hopefully it has some "unlock_all_features=0" entry XD.
Did notice bottom right on the HDO1000 front end there's a resistor marked "2501" while on the HDO4000 it's "2202". Everything else looks identical.
Also for those thinking it's a different substrate it's purely just a blue colour cast in the still image, in the previous video it's the same colour plus the 94V-0 compliance markings are shared across the two PCBs.
If it wasn't intentional at first, it definitely was later on. Re the 1054z
The ARTIX FPGA is way cheaper than you think Dave, it's almost 10X lower price than digikey. I have bought FPGAs for more than 10 years from china and the price is almost 10X lower than Digikey in single QTY.
I agree in china artix-7 is sold about 20$ ~30$
but not at the moment..
Sure, but usually every dollar counts at the low end. Obviously they didn't need to.
@@EEVblog Perhaps the R&D costs of using two different FPGAs outweighed the cost difference of them. There is probably a pin-compatible cheaper artix-7 they could drop into the hdo1000, but maybe Rigols HDL firmware would not fit within the constraints of the cheaper fpga without significant modification.
@@EEVblog Can you share the Artix7 part number, Dave?
Based on the price difference for mostly the same hardware, I wonder if they are binning during manufacturing 🤔
They break even in the basic models but do a big profit in the high end ones nice ideia :)
If they will be selling software-based upgrades or somebody hacks it, then we can be sure there is no in-factory binning 😉
They might not make money on the base model, just foot in the door and bait for bigger, brand loyalty. It makes good sense to have same layout and same processing to save all cost on software and if the chips aren't critically expensive it's just easier to reuse it. Even if you use different ADs the board and software could be virtually identical.
Also a few parts jumping in the frontends. How much does the AD cost?
Torx screws ain't rubbish. They are a lot less prone to wearing out and require less force! (except there are those annoying Torx screws with the pin in the middle).
You are not a regular viewer, I guess… 😉
You must be new here, welcome!
@@EEVblog i just want to say that this is both incredible unhelpfull, and that i, as semi-regular dont get it either... Rubbish as in "just another word for stuff", but not really negative?
@@felixhirt9284 Yes, basically. :)
Torx are the best screws I know of. The only Torx screw I've ever damaged was made from soft plastic.
When one sits down & thinks about it further, I believe Rigol is possibly playing 4D level chess in the scope market here.
I'm sure there are far more non-obvious differences to hamper the lower cost model but I feel their approach with the HDO1000 is to possibly go for volume sales across a wider customer base spread & sure, the extra BOM cost might add up but so do their sales wins.
The other logical reason is likely due to supply chain issues that ADCs & the extra chip/component supply lines are hampered due to the global supply line situation so Rigol had to adapt.
Furthermore, FPGAs are getting much cheaper & the real cost is in programming development, or maybe Rigol are toying with ideas for new scopes & wants to test the market waters.
Long ago, an ETI magazine designer stated "If you can't hide it, make it a feature".
That Rigol scopes coincidentally seem to be a hackers dream isn't lost on their sales/marketing & engineering/design teams as the HDO1000 & the MSO5000 scopes attract not just the lower end of the market ie hobbyist & cash strapped techs but I feel it's a killer move over their competitors ie Sglent, Hantek, Uni-T, Tektronix etc by also enticing those who love hacking things & have enticed buyers to get a foot in the door to explore more Rigol products ie Spectrum analysers, PSUs etc building their goodwill even further.
The growth in hacking & channels like "Linus Tech Tips", "Hak5" & all the defcon conference interest is definitely not being ignored by manufacturers who are likely thinking of new ways to market their products & gain a competitive edge, especially as global economies falter & people's budgets tighten.
This is in direct contrast to companies like Apple, John Deere etc who seem to enjoy locking everything down & maybe new tech breed companies like Rigol have detected the anti-lockdown sentiment & are developing products to exploit the opportunity.
Rigol knew they made an absolute killing on their DSO1000 series scopes & sure, re-using the PCB design knowledge so will entice even more buyers to the Rigol product range.
Lest we forget that Rigol with their DSO1000 series scopes literally threw a cat amongst the pigeons & has changed the way we all view scopes & I see many of their design decisions have filtered through to other manufacturers.
Hampering cheaper products by manufacturers is nothing new as I've seen TVs, printers, minicomputers, industrial electronics boards, consumer electronics boards which have taken similar approaches.
Having said that, Rigol are making no product guarantees as to any performance specs to further refine the design in later models & I wouldn't be surprised to see later versions with cheaper FPGAs & ADCs, redesigned PCBs in line with the declared specs per product.
My own dilemma now is whether to invest in a Rigol MSO5000 or a HDO1000 4 channel scope.
I applaud Rigol for giving hobbyists, hackers, techs & engineers some real cost effective choices in the scope market
@9:15 There is more via-stitching on the right side image (the 4000) indicating either we've got different channels displayed (not likely, Dave's too on-top-of-it for that) OR they are doing more work to isolate adjacent channels to reduce cross talk and give better strip-line/micro-strip performance... in other words, they might be demi-crippling the 1000 by altering the controlled impedance nature of the pcb and making the 1000 a bit 'noisier' as you approach/exceed the rated bandwidth. Maybe, possibly? Those traces in the 'flowed area between the relay and the 50 ohm device "appear" to be wider on the 1000 than the 4000 (by maybe 20%?) .. that could increase the distributed capacitance per unit length a bit.
I mean, vias are cheap. It's a trivial change in the Gerber files (or whatever the kids are using these days). No additional parts.
It might be fun to try to measure the width of the traces in the pre-A/D section... another way to alter the performance without altering the BOM.
Hey what do I know? ... I've been out of the biz for (gasp!!) for a while.
It's been nearly 3 decades since I left Mentor Graphics PCB Highspeed Design Tools Group.
This is called "sweating the product/asset" ... they already had a design, they halved the sample-rate and banged another device out to get additional dollars for no additional research, they won't care too much if people hack the 'upgraded' version of the oscilloscope, they've made their margin anyway. When people talking about 'margin' they need to remember, that a lot of the margin in a product goes to 'Labour', in this case, there wouldn't have been much additional labour involved, they're banging out basically the same product and it's probably already mostly automated... having a different product or a product that varies significantly would actually cost more, it would have been hours of intensive design work, and then testing etc etc.
Also hacking allows them to take market share from the other brands that don't allow it ;)
I know it’s a small thing for most people, but as of around 10 years ago, removing that “do not remove” sticker no longer voids the warrantee.
It is amazing what you can find out about a product when you open it up. I wonder what are the differences in the features of the two scopes that are software enabled. I would expect to find features in the 4000 that are enabled by default are software enabled in the 1000 but cost extra to get the required key.
It's gotta be the dye in the plastic. What other differences could there be? Maybe the screen?
SOFTWARE
I like my Tektronix 465B with DM44 and CMC251 frequency counter, HP8566B spectrum analyzer, Keithley 2001 w/ scan card and 4-wire kelvin probes, Rohde & Schwarz HMP2020 programmable power supply, Siglent SDG1032x awg, Simpson 260 series 8PRT, HP-410B VTVM, HP 4284A LCR Meter, Fluke 79 series II industrial electrical DMM that's been to absolute hell and back thousands of trips for 30 years and STILL works a champ...and my old black bakelite pressure style spring pressure style Amprobe. Got a couple of them big rack mount HP Harrison linear power supplies built in the 1960's...YES they still put out clean power with plenty of OOmPFH. LOVE me some new toys once in a while...especially when they promise hackey shenanigans. I would set it on my intern's bench as a gift I think...make HIM hack it. Then - sitting by all my ancient equipment that was built RIGHT...mock him with "You kids, n yer MUSIC!...with yer roller skates n yer hopscotch...yer 23 skiddoo! That's always fun.
There are about 6 changes between the front ends of the HDO 1000/4000. Additional components possible others missing or moved.
I once worked on a product where we sold two models and the BOM difference was less than $10 and we sold it for £50 more. The main reason was to provide some clean air between the models at the retailers.
This looks really tempting even though my SDS 1104X-E technically still does everything I need, just for he larger screen and 12-bits resolution
The HDO4000 manual mentions the 800Mhz version but only for 50 ohms input, in fact the limit of this oscilloscope is located at 500Mhz.
For that high frequency you need active probes anyway, isn't it? And there's no connection on the front panel.
@@jan.tichavsky
normal probes work fine up to 500Mhz and it is these probes that come with the 800Mhz version of the HDO4000.
@@jan.tichavsky The Rigol manual for this series of oscilloscopes mentions another model HDO2000, that doesn't even exist yet, but they will certainly launch soon.
I love how the hole for the battery connector is battery-shaped like a AA battery!
Rigol really is an impressive company.
The FPGA may have a different configuration between the two models.
Possible, but from a design perspective you would try and avoid that, just adds to the complexity to develop and maintain them. Better to just limit the sample rate and analog bandwidth.
14:07 - 1000$ difference, not two thousand. Fast A/D converters are expensive, so maybe the half sample rate is significant saving?
The biggest difference in the PCB was the copper pour. HDO4000 has copper pour, HDO1000 does not. Why would that be? Cheers, Ian
They both have the same copper pour, its just the shade of the silkscreen throwing you off.
at 9:18 it is showing 2 missing resistors above the chip. Might that be the difference?
Nicely spotted. That's one the output differential pairs. I don't know why there are two output diff pairs. I wouldn't expect different bandwidth outputs, but maybe one is the dedicated 800MHz path and that's not populated here?
@@EEVblog One for each ADC?
@@semifavorableuncircle6952 That makes sense, dual buffered output.
@@EEVblog given that both adcs have 4 inputs it would seem that in 4 channel mode at the highest rates they interleave all 4 channels.on both adcs. So the dual output make sense
There is two chips difference right in the middel there is another chip and a cap which seem to have been removed, right below there is another change with a small package. They might have changed the logic in the Altera chip though I suspect that they have simply found it is cheaper to make one solution and one tool chain for the whole series than it is to design multiple tool chains for each tier in the series.
As for why populate things that you do not need? I think they populated everything they needed to not have anything floating and as a result misbehaving. The chips that they "had" to use look to be fairly simple chips that are all in house designed and probably dirt cheap. If I where to put a price on it my guess is that the "extra" hardware they put in here costs them no more than $20 extra, vs a new design, with a different board layout, all new paths for the pick and place robots new testing setup, different tests and so on an so forth. I am willing to bet they have found that this is on a whole a lot cheaper way of producing differently tiered machines.
My guess is the volumes in which they expect to sell these things are not big enough to justify the additional spend of all that tooling and extra work to limit this thing from a hardware perspective.
As for the hacker argument, there are not all that many people with the tools and the money to go out buy this thing and modify it, those that have both will already have at least a few scopes and several projects on the go they might very well not have the interest in or the need to mess with this thing. Those that do are going to be a small minority of the userbase as any shop buying this will likely opt to keep the warranty rather than to crack open a brand new scope and poke around in it to get it to perform slightly better. If they need a better performing scope surely the company can and should buy one and if they are just doing it for fun it is not going to be paid for by the company I would hope nor would I expect that to be sanctioned by the company.
So the loss that hacking of the lower tier machines would cause is likely way to small for Rigol to worry about.
I love that Rigol continue their crazy-font tradition on the facia.
Not likely binning by removing any hardware...The blank locations never had components assembled. Sometimes land pads are moved to accommodate higher SMT yields. It is very common these days to use the same PCB for multiple products....especially when NRE consumes a large chunk of profit margins.
Well, as is more and more the case today, it is cheaper to give everyone the same hardware (and have to do only a single design, a single PCB, a single manufacturing line) and then differentiate using software, than to optimize on BOM cost for each model.
However, there are risks as well. E.g. there now is that debate about BMW cars where heated seats are an option, for which you can pay at time of order, but when you don't pay it the heated seats are installed anyway but they are disabled in software.
And, you can later opt to enable them paying a "subscription fee".
It is similar to what you see in this scope, but apparently people despise of it. They claim they already have paid the seats and have to pay extra to use them.
Similar to when Rigol would offer update packs to enable some 4000-line features in the 1000 line, either for a one-time payment or as part of some subscription package.
Some people would welcome it, others would bad-mouth it.
There might be a change in the second chip above the bird too. The chip on the higher end scope has text on it, which isn't present on the other one. Not sure if it's actually different or not.
It is the exact same chip. The lighting is just different and the text does not show up.
how many of these things do they realistically sell? Has to be like 50,000 or less. At those numbers, to make economies of scale work, you have to consolidate as much as possible with other models
Can't seem to find this model number (HDO1204), but something very similar appears as a 'DHO1074' on their website. What's up with that?
Even on their own international website, a series is named "DHO4000" in the table, but the picture shows the example product labelled with "HDO4804". I'm *guessing* they decided to change the model number at a late stage, but haven't corrected everything yet.
I think your prediction may be backwards. It happens a lot that for ease of design early sun models include hardware that’s too good. Then they spend time looking at where they can save money and they start downgrading the parts that are too good.
So predicting that the boards will end up on same revision I think is wrong. I think they will diverge more on next iteration.
Much like automobile building the margins are in the addons . So the bottom of the is low enough to make that the new board and bom is low enough to make the overall production profitable given the level of pick and place and using the same case. Looks like an economy of scale thing where there is lower cost by using same board and sorting the grade of chips . As others have said lower grade of same chips in the cheaper unit.
I think these are different revisions of the same board. They would not modify the high end one to low end, and leave so many pads still there that will never be used. I bet that the cheaper one is a newer revision of the higher end one. There are major differences in ground planes pours, and some via stitching. And minor frontend components placement changes.
I thought the same but it's just the lighting of the two photos. The ground pour and traces all look identical. And there are often lots of unpopulated pads on devices like computers.
Hi! In the old version there are 3 inductors on the top right side and all them are removed in the new version and all around them.
As a poor hobbyest I'm waiting for someone to work out the keygen. :)
Wow. I didn't knew you could find unlisted videos in the playlist.
It's been an annoying quirk forever.
My guess is 50 ohm will be a option, less warranty BS from blown front ends if 50 ohm is behind a paywall.
I heard that R&S does not have 50Ohms inside their "education market" range of scopes exactly for that reason. For a clueless student it is too easy to blow one up! If you need a terminator then external BNC passthrough terminators are reasonably cheap and they are much more robust. And students will not chase ultimate analog performance anyway. Also there is an additional educational benefit in actually demonstrating the terminator and showing what happens if you physically remove it while not changing anything else. The 1M only options are just more suitable for the application.
Just watched "The Love Box in Your Living Room" - a comedy pisstake of the history of the BBC by Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse, and in the credits at the end was a credit to 'Dave Jones / EEVBlog'. No idea what for, but it did feature a few Sinclair C5's!
the 4000's ADCs also have 4 differential pairs on both
possibly using 11 bit ADCs or maybe they are just giving all 4 channels to both ADCs to intelligently decide how to split up the channels for the highest bandwidth no matter what 2 channels are on?
As usual, the ADCs work interleaved. Each package has 4 ADC channels in it. but on the higher spec model both adc chips work with time interleaving as welll to double the sample rate.
couple of questionss.... 1) will there be any mso version of this new platform coming? (ofc with different pcb etc, but same frontend and adcs fpga, same software etc.).
2) cant we also examine the 2 channels board too, and just be checking how feasible it might be to add back missing channels? (clearly the bncs aren"t there, but what else? would be nice to see). many thanks & glad i waited
btw this price point makes the 4 channels version same price as the siglent 2000 plus (non hd, so 10 bit, but with mso)... so that was the scope i was saving up to get. a comparison would be really cool. or if siglent ever intend to compete here by dropping the price on their 12-bit hd model...
speaking of comparing (i guess all 3 of those scopes)... i remember recently we were discussing also about the zoom out scrolling, history modes or something on the forum.... that siglent has an improvement for their 12-bit hd scope. but the regular plus hardware is just different and most likely not capable of getting that improvement. so i wonder if this new rigol hdo1074 does have this feature. the usability and all that.
another point is that this scope is not mixed signal.. however in combination with the pc software and the 10mhz clock sync could there potentially be some way to sync up a dedicated logic analyzer? (at least in theory). and then to time align the capture between this rigol hdo and that dedicated logic analyzer? bit of a silly question, it would be better to wait for an mso version of this scope platform. just occured to me as another possible form of content around these 'the new budget entry level scopes'. (just not all of my questions here might not be worth covering though)
I have heard nothing about am MSO version. I would presume not, as it's not even catered for on the PCB. At least not at this price point.
Nice , put the missing components and flash it with the other scope firmware :-)
Why yes, that custom ADC is available for a mere $1000.
@@Okurka. don't forget to solder mor GPU with a lot of low esr decoupling capacitor so you end up with gaming computer.
If you have a look in the manual, the 70 to 200MHz is clearly stated to just be a SW option. They've probably tried to do a better job at making this hacker "proof" than the first series, but we'll see.
Got a 1072 thinking it can be upgraded to a1202 😂 now needed to know where can I buy licence to increase bandwith
Let's see it that way: They make about the same margin on the low end one if it shares all the parts with the higher end one compared to a separate unit with its own lower end parts but with a separate development life cycle. In contrast they make huge margins on the high end one because it shares all the parts and development with the lower end one.
3:15 A well a don't you know about the bird?
Well, everybody knows that the bird is the word!
A well a bird, bird, b-bird's the word
The top left QR code is gone. And it seems like they changed the silk screen font - check out the "V" in "94V-0" in the board label (moved from center to bottom right). Maybe the voltages didn't look good at their small size with the new font?
94V-0 sounds like a UL classification. UL marking are typically added by the board manufacturer.
We see that the soldermask is clearly different, so those PCBs came from different board manufacturers.
Yes that is correct at this point PCB’s are from to different PBC mfg.
On the low right missing that connector that I don't know where the ribbon cable should be connected on the other end!
This is more like it for the hobby budget. Super duper expensive test equipment has it's place. Will the high end features ever be used? 😎 Thanks for the interesting Rigol 12 bit scope.
Hi, Dave. What do you think of the oscilloscopes of thisDHO1000 series. Compare with Agilent or Tek old scope like 548xxx, tds7XX ?
Perhaps most of the cost comes from the work to test and calibrate the higher end model.
Always same: you do not pay the price that it costs, but R is demanding the price the market is giving!
Still happy with my "old" DS4014 (Serialgenerator did open all Features and enable 500MHz). 4GS, 12 Bit, 500MHz - nothing I possible would miss with the new versions :-). And everything for $1200 :-)
Great looking scope especially in white!
Now hear me out for a second. You can buy a $999 DHO1074 and a $699 DHO1072. You can then swap in the missing ADC from the 1072 into the 1074 and then unlock the bandwidth to 800MHz. You basically get a HDO4804 without the peripherals for $1000 less.
Rigol's sales guy offered me the same price as MSO5000 series and now I'm here looking to find the answer to my purchase.
Do you think they use the same configuration stream for the fpga in both models?
They might lock options that way? Or is fpga configuration part of the firmware?
Usually part of the firmware, and the main CPU will load it over on bootup. Would make sense to just use the same stream.
I guess Rigol avoids the cost of designing a new pcb, but still, I'd agree, people will be looking to hack the FW, perhaps even have Rossmann solder on an additional ADC. They must still be making a couple of bucks at 699.
Why yes, Rossman is preparing this mod right now, your cost? $1500.
Maybe the frontends are the same, but the once in the HDO1000 are some that didn't pass the speed tests for the quicker once?
lower binned parts probably yea
@@kevin666b Binning, yes. That was the term I was looking for. Thank you.
5ex on a stick! She’s a beauty
A thing of beauty... :)
@@Kirillissimus ..and a joy forever.
They did the same with MSO5000. Software becomes so more complicated on each generation that doesn't make any sense to wipe different CPU/MCU/FPGA on each pcb for this scale and price point.
I really interested to see if the 2ch scope has the same ADC. Sure I'm not the person who will do this, but if this thing gets hacked I see no problem in salvage an ADC from the 2ch version, add a few LDOs and load some HDO4000-style firmware...
Wonder if They are making it upgradeable in the future. Like an Exchange Program. They do that in the Defense Industry. So they can sell to other Allied County's in accordance with Export Controls. ITAR,EAR.
The Rigol manual for this series of oscilloscopes mentions another model HDO2000
Maybe it will turn into one of those historical "overclockers dream", like that legendary Celeron 400.
FIFY *Celeron 300A :)
As you surmised, the hardware is only a very small portion of the cost of a modern oscilloscope. The majority of the expense is in the development of the software and keeping it up-to-date. While you might be able to flash a different set of firmware on the scope, after adding/upgrading specific components, staying up-to-date on the software might be a challenge, and would obviously be pirating.
They are finally finding uses for all the rockchips, I've had one with a mali gpu in a cheap car head unit running android. They used to be the chip in all those really crappy tablets.
So Louis Rossman was right some day Rigol will soon have monthly suscription for enabling extra features for $50 a month as the hardware is nearly the same!!!
Hack the world! Love it Dave!
This is a bet, that free publicity will cover thin margins and they are sure, that it will cover development and manufacturing costs
spotted; what looks like a missing LVDS connection and supporting circuitry In top right
Maybe that missing ADC is a long lead part?
I even wonder if that custom Rigol chipset is even really custom, or just something with a custom brand on it?
I have been always intruged by frequency counters. Have a few but don't know have knowledge to use those. No clue where to connect on a receiver to see the frequency I am listening to, or, a transmitter to see the actual frequency broadcasting (all for ham purposes). Care to help? Cheers,.
what about the caps? are they the same? i know we're talking buttons but they might have changed them for cheaper in the same spec?
It’s like calculator territory, same internals but locked firmware to sell in different price ranges
Maybe they realized if they treat their beginner customers right, they will be rewarded by them when they become experienced (brand loyalty).
Model could be written to one-time-programming bits so it can only be one vs another once written.
I could see this having the full bandwidth and sample rate of the bigger brother when using a single channel with a hacked firmware, noice.
9:15 The bigger resistor (?) on the lower right has turned from 22k to 2.5k?
I think Rigol do this on purpose knowing theres a market for a low end hackable scope, just look at the success of the previous 1000 series 🤷♂️ .. 4 ch aswel for 1000buck awesome.. I wouldn't personally consider a 2ch scope when you can have 4ch for a couple of hundred bucks more, having 4 channels is just so useful, the times ive needed an extra channel compared to a faster sample rate speaks for itself 👍😎 looks like a nice scope.. I bought a 2000 series but I ended up selling it as it only had 2ch and was glitchy as hell, yes it was nice to have the larger screen and separate controls for each channel but I couldn't trust what I was looking at, freezing display, vanishing traces and so on ... Shame.... I went back to my 4ch hacked 1000series, and of course I've got my trusty CRO Tek 2465 which I love and will always be on my bench 👍
@eevblog .... i bought a 190-504. Always wanted one and I found a good deal. I wanted to check harmonics and now ive done that. Im not an EE....so now what else can i do with it!!??? i work in an industrial plant. I want to put it to work.
What's all the (missing) components in the upper right corner?
So we need to find someone who sells that custom ADC, so people can upgrade ;-D
Apart from that, really stupid idea, just sell the maxed out one for like $1500.
Paying $700 for crippled one sucks and $2500 for a few extra parts sucks equally.
What are those resistors above the last RAM chip doing??? 👀
could those by chance be the options configuration?
Probably not it. The position of them does not make sense, and the arrangement of resistors between those boards is identical. I'm betting configuration is done via a ROM chip somewhere. Or just different firmware. If Rigol were to lock it down I guess they could make the firmware encrypted and use some safe boot capability potentially with the private key burned into E-fuse of the SoC?
That's an extra diff pair that would go to the 2nd ADC, but there is no 2nd ADC, so no need for the resistors.
I'm a bit confused here. The o'scope in this video is the HDO1204 (4 channels, 12-bit, 200MHz), which the Rigol site says costs $1,699.
It's only the HDO1072 (2 channels, 12-bit, 70MHz) which is listed at $699 on the site?
I mean, I'm willing to bet the HDO1072 uses a very similar PCB, I was just questioning the price on the vid vs the o'scope being shown. lol
@@electronash At some point in the video Dave corrects himself and says that you have to pay $999 if you want 4 channels (HDO1074).
In other words: $999 (and not $699) is the "entry fee" as the 70 MHz 4-channel model will very likely use the same hardware (apart from the model sticker) as the HDO1204 -- and obviously Dave takes it as a given that it will be hackable like the earlier Rigol scopes.
@@oldguy9051 Yeah, it's not technically inaccurate, but I did initially think the o'scope in the teardown was the $699 model.
It may make some people think you can buy the 4-channel version at that price.
Still, it looks very promising that they can be hacked. I'd be happy to even solder the extra ADC chip if there was any way of getting hold of them.
I find this a lot like the right-to-repair / John Deere thing. I know companies need to make profit, but putting software locks on boards that are almost identical (and charging a big premium for the unlock) is shameful, tbh.
It's a little bit like the Sky Plus satellite boxes in the UK (and elsewhere) - the box itself is perfectly capable of recording, pausing and playback of channels without any interaction from Sky.
But if you don't pay the subscription, they don't allow that feature to work, even if you paid for hardware yourself in full.
I don't even think Rigol can say you're paying for extra quality control or "software", as the 'scope models are so similar.
(although I guess they wouldn't be able to put any guarantees on a hacked o'scope actually reaching the full bandwidth or sample rate, which is understandable.)
This reply ended up a lot longer than I expected, sorry. lol
btw, I get that some of these Rigol scopes are still great value-for-money anyway, and that maybe they are doing us a favour by making things hackable.
But I'd also be very annoyed if I was a customer paying $1,699 for the HDO1204, and then a few months later, saw that the $999 HDO1074 could be easily hacked to do the same job.
@@electronash The GPU and CPU in your PC could probably be hacked to something higher speed, are you very annoyed by that too? Its how industry works.
personally i prefer lighter coloured test equipment. the black/grey stuff just darkens the room
Please do a full review of DHO/HDO1000
Sometimes i do not understand sjit from want you are saying.....but when you say it i understand! Must be my relatives who live around your corner in Sidney ;)
Where are the bellyachers complaining why they are charging so much for the 4000 series?
How much does the high speed 12-bit ADC cost? When I’ve looked at giga-sample ADCs on Mouser they’ve been up in the $100 range, or higher, so the ADCs may actually be the majority of the parts cost.
Custom Rigol ASIC so we'll never know.
Just buy two scopes and salvage the ADC from one to the other.
the mouser price is significantly higher then the mass volume annual quantity contract you can get with the manufacturer.
@@EEVblog I just wonder if they have overstamped edition of one of commercial ADC... Who knows?
What about the firmware and may encryption keys?
There is still no proper review of this model (DHO1204) on youtube... Please Dave, could you do one?
probly the chip sply it's easer to stock smaller num parts
#Waitforthehack